Not Registered?

Welcome! Please register to view all of the new posts and forum boards - some of which are hidden to guests. After registering and gaining 10 posts you will be able to sell and buy items on our N'porium.

If you have any problems registering, then please check your spam filter before emailing us. Hotmail users seem to find their emails in the Junk folder.

My favourite locos on the Ridgacre branch are the ivatt 2-6-0s. With pick up on drivers and tender wheels they are good at slow running over points. They do this more reliably than any tank loco.I run a file gentky over some of the couplings when new if there are problems to get rid of any little bits of flash. It only takes the smallest amount to cause problems.

If I or any of my operating team do choose to indulge in a little shunting then we use a pair of these Minitrix BR361 shunters. They are the current tooling (not the old graunchy model), flywheel fitted and very smooth and quiet.

I have little Kof shunters which run fine over the electrofrogs and don't stall, but don't really have the weight to shift very much so we prefer the larger 361s.

Although I will agree that the smaller shunters aren’t always as reliable as they could be, the case is that it is the nature of the standard N coupling that are the biggest issue to my mind, as with probably most layouts larger locos will be used anyway. Most passing station layouts will be shunted by the train loco, which aside from short trip working is unlikely to be a shunter type. Take the present day as an example, 66’s doing the whole range of duties as there isn’t really many other loco types anyway......

I now use DG’s, find they generally work quite okay, and couple/un-couple with little force needed. The difference in looks is also quite marked, which is a nice bonus.

A few years ago I saw two layouts at a local show: one was a model of , I think, Burnham on Sea (there were, I remember 2 Layouts of the same place, both of which featured in the modelling press around the same time. The one I saw used what I think were DG couplings which seemed to work most of the time (I went back several times to view!) but unfortunately the layout seemed to be suffering derailments each time I looked (which I am prepared to forgive given the apparent tribulations of exhibiting). The second layout was a small shunting layout, probably about 2 feet long, using Rapido coupling and it worked every time! Again, I went to watch numerous times, but to my regret (I had very young grandson in tow) never asked the operator what the couplings were. What an idiot I am....I suspect they were Peco ‘Elsie’ uncouplers or similar- so Uncoupling can be done reliably- I just need to work out how to do it for myself....

Ive assisted in the Exhibition of a "oo" exhibition fiddle yard and terminus layout. A day of bringing in Trains, uncoupling the loco running round and pulling back out, or bringing in a freight , splitting reforming and pull out. A very tiring day and quiet often coupling problems. I've yet to find a N gauge coupling I like that is reliable.

I've also exhibited a roundy with branch, much less tiring. So my intention is to set up Tiree with hopefully 4 four trains each way, for the roundy, plus a branch shuttle. Yes a couple of the roundies will be freight and just occasionally will I pull one into the yard for shunting if I can find a reliable remote coupling. I hate the hand of God at shows...

One thing of course is Generally a Higher percentage of N is Modern period rather than steam period in OO. If you are in the last 40 Years there isn't that much shunting done...So all those sidings are disused as freight has gone to the roads.. Even with the 1963 date of Tiree, I'm grassing between the tracks of the sidings, as BR was already running down and closing lines long before Implimenting the Beeching report.

My experience of rapidos is that the Peco Elsie are great for having little resistance and lifting easily for coupling, but then this also means they seem to uncouple rather easily as well when running in a train, which is annoying.

By contrast the sprung types keep coupled when running, but the force needed to overcome their resistance to lifting is usually greater than the weight resistance of the wagon/coach and so they get pushed along rather than coupling up.

i have always used 3-link etc in other scales and so have no issue with the so called hand-of-God - I currently uncouple the DG's this way. After all, apart from recent times most UK coupling/un-coupling has been done this way in the real world. But then I have always done what suits me best, which might not be to other's tastes. We are all different after all.

I agree with Izzy and others that main problem is couplings. Pointwork can be made to work fairly reliably. We have several different routes available to us on Northallerton and the trains traverse these consistently. However, its worth noting that Northallerton was built as a 'watching the trains go by' layout with no shunting. One of the original ideas was to include some sort of engineering sidings on the lower level but this was quickly dismissed as superfluous.I think its also worth mentioning that @belstone from these parts has been developing a really interesting coupling system discussed here http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?topic=22058.msg498999#msg498999

cheersKirky

Logged

Northallerton is in the August 2018 edition of Raiway Modeller and in real life at the Normanton and Pontefract exhibition. New College, Park Lane, Pontefract. 26/27th January 2019

My experience of rapidos is that the Peco Elsie are great for having little resistance and lifting easily for coupling, but then this also means they seem to uncouple rather easily as well when running in a train, which is annoying.

You might find a dab of 'Tacky Wax' on each coupling might prevent the random uncoupling.

By contrast the sprung types keep coupled when running, but the force needed to overcome their resistance to lifting is usually greater than the weight resistance of the wagon/coach and so they get pushed along rather than coupling up.

Therein lies much of the problem for me. Wagons/coaches dancing off down the track rather than coupling up.

If I or any of my operating team do choose to indulge in a little shunting then we use a pair of these Minitrix BR361 shunters. They are the current tooling (not the old graunchy model), flywheel fitted and very smooth and quiet.

I have little Kof shunters which run fine over the electrofrogs and don't stall, but don't really have the weight to shift very much so we prefer the larger 361s.

We all have different tastes whichever side of the layout we are on - some just like watching the trains go by, and find shunting boreing, others like the intricacies of shunting and find the same train chasing it's own tail round in circles boreing.I find shunting to be quite absorbing and in a way therapeutic.

I think we should clarify that on James st we rarely use 03/08's to shunt with, as has been mentioned due to reliability

On Hoglington, the most popular shunter for the carriage sidings (with both operators and viewers) is an 04 with a runner track fitted with pickups on the truck so 10 wheel pick-up. It can easily shift 12 coaches on the flat (except Minitrix Gresleys)

On Hoglington, the most popular shunter for the carriage sidings (with both operators and viewers) is an 04 with a runner track fitted with pickups on the truck so 10 wheel pick-up. It can easily shift 12 coaches on the flat (except Minitrix Gresleys)

An insight into my OCD here: I never really like the idea of hard-wiring across coupled vehicles....unless it’s a runner truck!

Apparently the gmfact that some 03/04s spend most of their lives permantly coupled to such wagons is enough to satisfy the niggles

Thanks for all your input into this..... My further opinions on some of the above....

Both Rapidos (with modification) and EZShunts can be used to "let go" and to couple up pretty reliably, (in my experience). The problem comes with the "delayed action" part. Clearly Rapidos were never designed for this, and I have my doubts about this functionality in EZShunts. However, leaving empties in a siding and/or picking up a full train shouldn't be an issue. More complex shunting moves might be - but careful placement of magnets means that fairly intricate patterns of movement are possible on "Horseblock Lane" for example.

It should't be too hard for an engine to uncouple from a train and go on shed, or the reverse move, and if an engine comes off shed to run light to somewhere off-scene there is no coupling implication.

Short wheelbase locos are probably not as reliable as multi-axle diesels, I concur. My 08 is so "lumpy" that I couldn't use if for shunting, (in fact anything!) but let's see how good the N Gauge Society's Hunslet will be.

Whether or not shunting is interesting to the onlooker is of course completely legitimate. But I think at the layout design stage it is possible to arrange things so that "shunting" takes place while main line running is going on so you can appeal to everyone. This wouldn't be possible necessarily with an accurate model of a prototype; but if you go down this route, shouldn't your layout also operate like the prototype....meaning that factory should occasionally get a delivery!

So I would still make the appeal to layout operators; if you have a siding why not use it!!! Just saying.....

Cheers Jon

Logged

“We must conduct research and then accept the results. If they don't stand up to experimentation, Buddha's own words must be rejected.” ― Dalai Lama XIV